作者： chenchen

The Missing Anthropological Exhibit at the American Museum of Natural History

The American Museum of Natural History serves 5 million visitors annually, ranging from elementary schools to foreign tourists. Although massive displays like the dinosaur halls are famous draws, the museum is also well known for its anthropological exhibits, which include the Hall of Asian Peoples, the Hall of African Peoples, and so forth. However, for 148 years, the museum has decided to not create a hall for Europeans. The museum, in order to present visitors an updated view of anthropology, must add a Hall of European Peoples.

The idea of more European culture in our institutions can sound unnecessary, and even racist, to many. But before judging, ask yourself: What are the consequences of portraying Europeans as above anthropology? When only people of color are exhibited in the museum, visitors learn that there must be something intrinsically different about European culture. The exhibits teach this because they are rooted in a white, 19th century worldview. Although updated, the exhibits still reflect a time when European artifacts were considered “art” or “history,” while other artifacts were labeled “natural history.” The museum’s European superiority was so extreme that, in 1897, six Eskimos were displayed solely as “a source of amusement” for visitors. Such racism in anthropology was common at a time when anything European was considered “civilization,” while anything else was labeled “primitive.”

Admirably, anthropologists have worked for years to replace racism with more modern principles. These principles include that all cultures are equal and deserve respect, and that anthropologists shouldn’t label a culture “primitive” just because they are different. What the museum has not done, by excluding Europe from display, is teach visitors that all cultures deserve the same level of scientific scrutiny. The truth is that anthropology should apply to all cultures, and no ethnicity should be above scientific study. Margaret Mead once said that “the more complex a society becomes, the more fully the law must take into account the diversity of the people who live in it.” I would argue that the more complex our view of culture becomes, the more fully our institutions must take into account the diversity of the people who visit.

If the museum is truly for all people, then it must be about all people. There is nothing intrinsically different between Europe’s culture and that of the rest of the world. All cultures are equally complex and impressive. The only reason to isolate the study of Europe from the rest of the world would be because Europe is somehow special, something we know to be false. European culture is unique, but not uniquely superior. Yet, until Europeans are included in the Museum’s Anthropological Halls, visitors will learn otherwise.

Works Cited

Kaufman, Michael T. “About New York; A Museum’s Eskimo’s Skeletons and Its Own. The New York Times. August 21, 1993.

Popova, Maria. “Margaret Mead on the Root of Racism and the Liability of Law Enforcement”. brainpickings.org. 2014.

The Collateral Damage of Defending Democracy

CIA-operated drones are leaving an unjustifiable amount of damage in their wake. Fahim Qureishi was thirteen years old when seven of his family members were massacred, he lost one eye and had shrapnel impaled in his stomach. Sadaullah Wazir was fourteen years old when four of his family members were murdered and he had both of his legs amputated. Nabila was eight years old when her grandma was obliterated in front of her, and Nabila suffered from severe burns and shrapnel in her shoulder. All of these children paid a high price despite the fact that there were no militants present.

When drone operators aim for specific individuals in what Barack Obama termed “targeted killing,” the intended target is rarely killed the first time. In running multiple airstrikes, many innocent lives are taken as collateral. United States’ officials claim that these strikes are “precise” even though they are based off intelligence that has resulted in twenty-eight people being sacrificed for every suspected criminal. In Pakistan, twenty-four men were targeted, but 874 people were murdered including 142 children. John Brennan, former CIA director, stated in 2011 that drone strikes apply “targeted, surgical pressure to the groups that threaten us,” but Fahim, Sadaullah and Nabila were not dangers to national security. Therefore, these drone strikes must end as there is no way to prevent innocent lives from being lost in an attack that may not even eliminate a potential threat.

Under international human rights law, the targeted individual must pose an imminent threat that only lethal force can prevent. Furthermore, Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that “no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.” Simply being suspected of some connection to a “militant” organization or fitting the profile of a terrorist in an area where terrorists are known to operate is not legally sufficient to make someone a target for killing. The United States cannot constantly reprimand other countries for their lack of regard about civilian life when the drone war itself overlooks these ethical values.

The United States supports the practice of due process of law and the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; however, overseas drone strikes do not uphold these values that are so frequently preached. 3,674 people in Iraq and Afghanistan have been massacred throughout this war that started with George W. Bush and still continues today. This murderous campaign is completely indefensible. The targets are only suspected of crime, and even if that suspicion was founded, executing them without a trial is unjustified. These attacks contradict the basic values of this free country, and should not be used to “defend democracy.”

Works Cited

Ackerman, Spencer. “41 Men Targeted but 1,147 People Killed: US Drone Strikes – the Facts on the Ground.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 24 Nov. 2014. Accessed 21 Feb. 2017.

Akbar, Mirza Shahzad. “Obama’s Forgotten Victims.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 22 May 2013. Accessed 21 Feb. 2017.

“International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Accessed 21 Feb. 2017.

“Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” United Nations, United Nations. Accessed 21 Feb. 2017.

The Asian Misnomer: What the Affirmative Action Debate Misses

One Scantron bubble and five letters: “Asian.” That’s all the College Board needs to encompass the heritage of thousands of students and 48 countries. Those five letters are also what many college admissions officers use as the basis for establishing diversity through affirmative action. While some institutions provide options such as “Chinese,” “Asian Indian” and “Other Asian,” a glance at official demographics reports shows that they don’t actually care; all of these ethnicities are still homogenized as Asian.

Proponents of affirmative action commonly argue that diversity improves critical thinking, creativity and race relations. Colleges like Caltech, which admitted 42 percent Asians in 2016, are then doing a disservice to their students by not exposing them to a variety of perspectives. This train of thought assumes that all “Asians” have similar cultural values, namely prioritizing academic achievement and exam scores.

Painting all Asians with the brush of the model minority — assimilatory and successful — is not only false, but dangerous. Though 72 percent of Indian-Americans and 53 percent of Chinese-Americans have a college degree, Hmong-, Laotian-, and Cambodian-Americans drop out of high school at rates approaching 40 percent. Grouping Muslim- and Chinese-Americans makes them both appear well-adjusted on paper, but in person Muslims are faced with severe xenophobia. Even if Chinese- and Indian-Americans have an unfair advantage in college admissions, lumping all Asians with them causes underprivileged Asian subgroups to not receive the attention and government services they need.

More shockingly, Bangladesh, Myanmar and China are not the same place; progressive Americans seem to think Democrats and Republicans have different countries of origin, yet they assume Muslim-, Burmese-, and Chinese-Americans all live in Confucian homes and celebrate Chinese New Year.

In fact, the Muslims in Bangladesh celebrate Eid, in Myanmar people throw water during Thingyan, and neither country places a heavy emphasis on Confucian values; do not conflate Asian with Chinese. Asia encompasses a series of rich, complex cultures, and claiming a high concentration of Asians will destroy on-campus diversity is not only false, but erases the unique perspectives offered by Asian students.

Promoting racial diversity is undoubtedly important to college campuses, but the definition of diversity is flawed. Asians are not a monolith, and should not be treated as such; schools should actively recognize all 48 linguistic groups currently encompassed by “Asian.” This is not to single out Chinese students as the problem, but rather to remedy affirmative action’s unfair discrimination against disadvantaged Asian subgroups. Understanding the intricacies of “Asian America” would allow college admissions officers to create richer on-campus diversity, while simultaneously granting visibility, and potentially economic or social aid, to underrepresented “Asians.”

Works Cited

Chang H, Sharon. “The Growing Poverty Crisis That Everyone Is Ignoring.” ThinkProgress. 27 Sep. 2015.

Saulny, Susan and Steinberg, Jacques. “On College Forms, a Question of Race, or Races, Can Perplex.” The New York Times. 13 June 2011

Bollinger, Lee C. “Affirmative Action Isn’t Just a Legal Issue. It’s Also a Historical One.” The New York Times. 24 June 2016.

Progress 2050. “Who Are Asian Americans?” 28 April 2015.

Office of the Registrar. “Fall Enrollment 2016-17.” Caltech. N.d.

Ramakrishnan, Karthick. “National Origin Data Would be Helpful in Understanding Asian-Americans.” 16 Oct. 2015.

The Anguish of the Rich

China has experienced unprecedented economic growth in the past 30 years. A widely accepted positive correlation between happiness and wealth predicts that this growth should lead to higher life satisfaction, especially among the upper classes. Contrary to traditional understandings that equate increasing economic prosperity with increases in a nation’s overall happiness, however, a recent paper on the paradox of Chinese progress draws an unusual conclusion:

In recent decades in China, life satisfaction declined dramatically at precisely the time of its unprecedented economic growth. More educated respondents, those in urban areas, and those with insufficient rest and leisure, are much less satisfied with their lives than the average.

The unhappiness of China’s growing middle class illustrates the futility of equating material success with happiness. Long working hours and high workplace stress are usually the prerequisites for ascension to higher socio-economic status. Exposure to ever-higher standards for success triggers a persistent feeling of extreme pressure to succeed, and this phenomenon is especially conspicuous among the educated. Many find that their higher aspirations are combined with an increasing lack of security in the turbulent modern economy. A vicious cycle is formed, and those trapped within it begin experiencing feelings of anxiety and depression. An increase in the incidence of mental illness is a long-term manifestation of this phenomenon: China’s psychiatric hospital admissions have increased by 183.21 percent from 2002 to 2012.

Karma Ura, president of The Centre for Bhutan Studies and GNH (Gross National Happiness) Research, has introduced a formula to gauge a nation’s wealth according to the following criteria: access to a “ravishing environment,” “vibrant health,” “strong communal relationships” as well as “meaning in life and freedom to free time.” If this formula is used as the benchmark for success, China’s economic development has clearly been achieved at the price of many people’s happiness.

In order to boost productivity, Deng Xiaoping converted the institutions of the highly-centralized planned economy to market institutions. This shift engendered a period of economic growth. While bringing economic prosperity to many, these largely-successful reforms also led to unchecked exploitation of land and natural resources, soaring average work intensity, rising income inequality and loss of communal beliefs. The legacy of reform includes severe environmental problems, a breakdown of social safety nets, and a conviction among the middle class that materialistic pleasure equals spiritual happiness. All these elements combined to create a sense of unhappiness among the bourgeoisie.

It is time that Chinese society prioritized mental health over economic success. The government should encourage this change by introducing GNH as a complement to GDP, placing more emphasis on improving people’s well-being and enacting policies that encourage a healthy work-life balance and a fair and secure environment for all.

Works Cited

Graham, Carol Shaojie Zhou, and Junyi Zhang. “Happiness and Health in China: The Paradox of Progress.” Brookings Global Working Papers. Brookings Institution. 10 Jun. 2015. Web. 30 Mar. 2017.

Ryback, Timothy W. “The U.N. Happiness Project.” The New York Times. 28 Mar. 2012. Web. 1 Apr. 2017.

Easterlin, Richard A., Fei Wang and Shun Wang. “Growth and Happiness in China, 1990-2015.” World Happiness Report 2017. Web. 1 Apr. 2017.

Chow, Gregory C. “Economic Reform and Growth in China.” Annals of Economics and Finance. 5 (2004): 93-118.